Evidence mapPaperPMID 39054301Full record

ArticleBJGP open2024

'What script am I meant to use?': a qualitative study in chronic primary pain.

Niamh Blythe, Carmel Hughes, Nigel D Hart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Niamh BlytheSchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1446-9000
Carmel HughesSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4656-6021
Nigel D HartSchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK n.hart@qub.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8168-1746

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic primary pain (CPP) as a diagnosis has been introduced in the recent International Classification of Diseases, 11

aimTo explore GP perspectives in relation to caring for people with CPP, including challenges encountered and use of related guidelines in practice. DESIGN &

settingA UK-wide qualitative interview study in primary care.

methodPurposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit 15 GP participants from England, Northern Ireland, Wales, and Scotland. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

resultsThe following three main themes were generated: (1) 'How to start? Problematic beginnings', which referred to difficulties regarding diagnosis; (2) 'Where to go? Mapping the management challenge'; and (3) 'How to get there? Navigating strategies and response', which explored GP awareness and acceptability of UK guidelines for chronic pain. Areas identified for potential improvement included increased access to non-pharmacological management (NPM) and secondary care services, support with deprescribing, and an expanded multidisciplinary team input.

conclusionCPP is complex to both diagnose and manage. Although guidelines provide a useful framework, they pose challenges when translating into day-to-day practice.

Indexed as

chronic painchronic primary paingeneral practitionershealthcare guidelinesqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID39054301
PMCPMC11687266

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.